An accounting professor has carried out a study to compare different

teaching methods used in three different sections of an elementary

accounting course. A sample of students have been randomly selected
from each section, and their grades in the final test, as shown below,
are used to determine whether the teaching methods made any
difference.
Method 1
84
70
72
67

Method 2
78
85
93
66
99

Method 3
97
89
81
73
77

Can we infer at the 5% significance level that the population means of

the three methods differ?
X 1 73.25, S1 7.46, X 2 84.2, S 2 12.91, X 3 83.4, S3 9.63

Automobile insurance appraisers examine cars that have been involved in accidental collisions and
estimate the cost of repairs. An insurance executive claims that there are significant differences in the
estimates from different appraisers. To support his claim he takes a random sample of six cars that
have recently been damaged in accidents. Three appraisers then estimate the repair costs of all six
cars. From the data shown below, can we infer at the 5% significance level that the executives claim
is true?
Estimated Repair Cost
Car
Appraiser 1 Appraiser 2 Appraiser 3
1
650
600
750
2
930
910
1010
3
440
450
500
4
750
710
810
5
1190
1050
1250
6
1560
1270
1450
Use SSC = 52877.78, SSR = 1844311.11, SST = 1932644.44
Source of Variation
Treatments
Blocks
Error
Total

H 0 : 1 2 3

SS
52,877.78
1,844,311.11
35,455.56
1,932,644.44

df
2
5
10
17

MS
26,438.889
368,862.222
3545.556

F
7.457
104.035

P-value
0.01042
0.00003

H 0 : 1 2 3

H1 :
At least two means differ
Grand mean = 80.79
SSC = 4(73.25 80.79)2 + 5(84.2 80.79)2 + 5(83.4 80.79)2 =
319.607
SSE = 3(7.46)2 + 4(12.91)2 + 4(9.63)2 = 1204.75
SS
Treatments 319.607
Error
1,204.75
Total
1,524.357

df
2
11
13

MS
159.804
109.523

Ho: Quality is independent of Manufacturer.

Ha: Quality is not independent of Manufacturer.
e11 =

e12 =

H1 :
At least two means differ

e21 =

Test statistic: F = 7.457

Decision Rule: reject Ho if F> 4.103
Conclusion: Reject the null hypothesis. Yes, there are significant differences in the
estimates from different appraisers.

F
1.459

Test statistic: F = 1.459

F.05, 2,11 3.98

Rejection region: F >

Conclusion: Dont reject the null hypothesis. No, the population means
of the three methods do not differ.

e22 =

(36)(95)
380
(36)(95)
380
(344)(95)
380
(344)(95)
380

Quality
Unacceptable
Acceptable
Sub-total

SUMMARY OUTPUT (MODEL 1)

Regression Statistics
Multiple R
R Square
Adjusted R Square
Standard Error
Observations

F critical
4.103
3.326

A computer manufacturer is considering sourcing supplies

of an electrical component from four different
manufacturers. The director of purchasing asked for 95
samples from each manufacturer. The numbers of
acceptable and unacceptable components from each
manufacturer are shown in the following table. Perform a
test to determine whether the quality of the component
depends on the manufacturer. Let = .05. How does this
help management to make decisions?

2 =

0.766794742
0.587974176
0.551349659
25139.78873
50

df
4
45
49

SS
40585376295
28440403984
69025780279

MS
1.01E+10
6.32E+08

F
16.05411

Intercept
People
Income
Comptors
Price

Coefficients
-68363.15239
6.439423362
7.272304922
-6709.432007
15968.76477

Standard Error
78524.72511
3.70511702
0.935794757
3818.542618
10219.02625

t Stat
-0.87059
1.737981
7.771261
-1.75707
1.56265

P-value
0.388597
0.089054
7.43E-10
0.085709
0.125141

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Equation
Model Useful?
Which independent variable contributes?
Proportion of variation unexplained? Explained?
Standard Error of Estimate:
Multicollearity?

Revenue
1
0.174028

People
1

Income

=9

e14 =

= 86

e23 =

= 86

e24 =

(11 9) 2
9

Price

(8 9) 2
9

(8386)
86

(8786)2
86
2

Comptors

(36)(95)
380
(36)(95)
380
(344)(95)
380
(344)(95)
380

=9

=9

= 86

= 86

Manufacturer
A
B
C
D
Sub-total
12 (9) 8 (9)
5 (9) 11 (9)
36
83 (86) 87 (86) 90 (86) 84 (86)
344
95
95
95
95
380

(8386)
86

Correlation matrix
Revenue
People

Significance F
3.0831E-08

e13 =

(12 9) 2
9

ANOVA
Regression
Residual
Total

=9

(5 9) 2
9

(8386)2
86
2

(9086)
+ 86

Income
Comptors
Price

0.717964
0.085597
0.009324

0.059361
0.153526
-0.09333

1
0.330347
-0.19528

1
-0.15117

(8386)
86

(8486)
+ 86

= 3.68

= .05, df = (c 1)( r 1) = (4 1)(2 1)

=3
2.05,3 = 7.8147
Since the observed

22 = 3.68 < 2.05,3 =

7.8147, the decision is do not reject the null

hypothesis. Quality is independent of Manufacturer

Because of the rising costs of industrial accidents, many chemical, mining,

and manufacturing firms have instituted safety courses. Employees are
encouraged to take these courses designed to heighten safety awareness. A
company is trying to decide which one of two courses to institute. To help
make a decision eight employees take course 1 and another eight take
course 2. Each employee takes a test, which is graded out of a possible 25.
The safety test results are shown below. Do these data provide sufficient
evidence at the 5% level of significance to infer that the marks from course 1
are lower than those of course 2? Assume that the scores are not normally
distributed.

H0 :
The test score of course 1 is the same as the test score of course 2

H1 :
The test score of course 1 is lower than the score of course 2
Course 1
Rank
Course 2
rank
14
1.5
20
11.5
21
13.5
18
8
17
6.5
22
15
14
1.5
15
3.5
17
6.5
23
16
19
9.5
21
13.5
20
11.5
19
9.5
16
5
15
3.5
W1==55.5
W2==80.5
U1=n1*n2 + n1(n1+1)/2 W1 = 8(8) + 8*9/2 55.5 = 44.5
U2 = n1*n2 + n2(n2+1)- W2 = 8(8) + 8*9/2 80.5 = 19.5
U = 19.5 (the smaller of U1 and U2),
p-value= 0.1172 for U=20 (from table A14)
Decision Rule: reject Ho if p-value< =0.05
Conclusion: Do not reject the null hypothesis.
The marks from course 1 are not lower than those of course 2.

Assume that the test scores are not normally distributed. Test to determine
whether the extra help sessions have been effective at the 5%
significance level.

H0 :
The test score before is the same as the test score after

H1 :
The test score before is lower than the score after
S
t
u
d
e
n
t

A
b
b
y
B
r
e
n
d
a
C
a
r
m
e
n
D
a
v
i
d
E
d
w
a
r
d
F
r
a
n
k
G
i
l
l

d
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
c
e

|
di
ff
er
e
n
c
e|

1
1

1
1

H
e
i
d
i

T 4
Rejection region:
T-=20.5, T+=7.5

, (n=7)

T
Test statistic: T =
= 7.5
Conclusion: Dont reject the null hypothesis. No, the extra help session have
not been effective.

In general, before an academic publisher agrees to publish a book, each

manuscript is thoroughly reviewed by university professors. Suppose that
the Duxbury Publishing Company has recently received two manuscripts for
statistics books. To help them decide which one to publish both are sent to
30 professors of statistics who rate the manuscripts to judge which one is
better. Suppose that 10 Professors rate manuscript 1 better and 20 rate
manuscript 2 better.

In a diet test, each of four diet programs is applies to a sample of people. At

the end of three weeks, the amount of pounds people lost is shown below.
Test to determine if there is enough evidence at the 5% significance level to
infer that at least two diet programs differ.
1
12
6
18
23

Which test is appropriate for this situation?

Can Duxbury conclude at the 5% significance level that manuscript 2 is more
highly rated than manuscript 1?
The sign test, rating manuscript 1 better is + sign, rating manuscript better 2
is negative sign

H0 :

rank
3
1
8
15

Tj

2
19
10
13
20
25

27

rank
9.5
2
4
12
16
43.5

3
16
20
26
19

rank
5.5
12
17
9.5
44

4
28
17
22
16
20

rank
18
7
14
5.5
12
56.5

H0 :
The two manuscripts are rated the same, p=0.5

H1 :

The weight losses for all four programs are the same.

H1 :

Manuscript 1 rating is lower than manuscript 2 rating, p<0.5

S = 10, =30(0.5)=15, =2.739
Test statistic: z = (10-15)/2.739 = -1.825

z z0.05 1.645

Rejection region:
Conclusion: Reject the null hypothesis. Yes, there is enough evidence to
conclude at the 5% significance level that manuscript 2 is more highly rated
than manuscript 1.

At least two programs have different weight losses.

2
0.05,3

7.8147

Rejection region:

T j2

27 2 43.5 2 44 2 56.5 2

1683.15
4
5
4
5

n= 18

T j2
12
12
3 n 1
1683.15 3(19) 2.058

n(n 1)
nj
18(19)

Test statistic: K = 2.058

Conclusion: Dont reject the null hypothesis. No, there is no difference in
weight across the four diet programs.